On Sun, 03 Dec 2023 13:01:28 -0300, Julieta Shem wrote:
So we can sort of blame that partly on the user interfaces. Somehow,
the subject line should come as a last step. That might be one of the
reasons lay people love the new proprietary software for conversations
--- they don't ask them to solve hard problems. On the contrary: they
force them not to solve them. (You don't have much to say? No problem:
we won't let you write more than n characters anyway.)
Even worse, these modern interfaces often /force/ people to post,
inundating the medium with trivial chatter. ("You don't have anything to
say? Too bad; you need to post /something/ in order to keep your account open.")
On 03/12/2023 16:01, Julieta Shem wrote:
One difficulty there is that a good subject requires a summary of the
content, a hard problem that schools have been failing to solve.
Notice, too, that lay people write the subject first and the message,
second, which is roughly the same as writing out the number first and
doing the arithmetic later.
So we can sort of blame that partly on the user interfaces. Somehow,
the subject line should come as a last step. That might be one of
the reasons lay people love the new proprietary software for
conversations --- they don't ask them to solve hard problems. On the
contrary: they force them not to solve them. (You don't have much to
say? No problem: we won't let you write more than n characters
anyway.)
The problem there is that when you are reading the message you want
the title (summary) first.
It's quite valid to say you should write it later - but that would
result in a different layout for reading and writing, which would be confusing.
For me having the title first works most of the time. It's a one line
summary of what I want to talk about. I then expand on it in the
body. Occasionally I go back and change the title - but not often.
On 2023-12-04 20:46, Scott Dorsey wrote:
On 12/3/23 10:39, Lew Pitcher wrote:
You are not the customer. You are the product. Forcing people to
Even worse, these modern interfaces often /force/ people to post,
inundating the medium with trivial chatter. ("You don't have anything to >>> say? Too bad; you need to post /something/ in order to keep your account >>> open.")
post
to keep their account open means more traffic, and traffic is money.
--scott
And that's the truth.
Julieta Shem <jshem@yaxenu.org> writes:
On 2023-12-04 20:46, Scott Dorsey wrote:
On 12/3/23 10:39, Lew Pitcher wrote:
You are not the customer. You are the product. Forcing people to
Even worse, these modern interfaces often /force/ people to post,
inundating the medium with trivial chatter. ("You don't have anything to >>>> say? Too bad; you need to post /something/ in order to keep your account >>>> open.")
post
to keep their account open means more traffic, and traffic is money.
--scott
And that's the truth.
Oh, I'm sorry for messing up your quote. That was ThunderBird's fault
or my fault for not setting it up properly. (I have been trying it
out.)
The problem there is that when you are reading the message you want
the title (summary) first.
Can we untie the way it is displayed from the way it is written?
Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> writes:
On 12/3/23 15:29, Vir Campestris wrote:
The problem there is that when you are reading the message you want
the title (summary) first.
That's a UI -> UX problem.
On 12/4/23 17:34, Julieta Shem wrote:
Can we untie the way it is displayed from the way it is written?
Yes.
The UI can be changed so that the UX is improved.
Let's dig further. How should a mail or a USENET client display a form
so that the user fills out the subject only after the whole message is >written?
On 12/3/23 15:29, Vir Campestris wrote:
The problem there is that when you are reading the message you want
the title (summary) first.
That's a UI -> UX problem.
On 12/4/23 17:34, Julieta Shem wrote:
Can we untie the way it is displayed from the way it is written?
Yes.
The UI can be changed so that the UX is improved.
Thunderbird will prompt if the subject is blank and ask if you want to
change it before sending.
Let's dig further. How should a mail or a USENET client display a form
so that the user fills out the subject only after the whole message is written?
The most obvious approach, I think, is to put the field at the bottom of
the message.
We can expect users ...Nope. No we can't.
Many people couldn't care less, of course. Many people must think that subjects are a totally useless thing.
For these people, perhaps the
client could write something else that would be minimally useful for us.
I don't what would be minimally useful.
In this case T'Bird misses the heart of the problem we're discussing
here. We're not discussing how to remember to write a subject, but to
only write it after the whole post is written, when it's much easier to describe it in a few words. (Of course, it's nice to be remembered
about an empty subject.)
xrn does it perfectly. Opens a new composition window with the
headers filled in and the cursor positioned after the ':' in
the Subject: header.
Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> writes:
On 12/3/23 15:29, Vir Campestris wrote:
The problem there is that when you are reading the message you want
the title (summary) first.
That's a UI -> UX problem.
On 12/4/23 17:34, Julieta Shem wrote:
Can we untie the way it is displayed from the way it is written?
Yes.
The UI can be changed so that the UX is improved.
Let's dig further. How should a mail or a USENET client display a form
so that the user fills out the subject only after the whole message is written?
[...]
Many people couldn't care less, of course. Many people must think that subjects are a totally useless thing.
On 12/5/23 15:22, Julieta Shem wrote:
Let's dig further. How should a mail or a USENET client display a form
so that the user fills out the subject only after the whole message is
written?
I'm sure there are ways.
I would not choose to use such a client.
The most obvious approach, I think, is to put the field at the bottom of
the message.
I suspect that's going to cause other problems in and of itself. But
you do you.
I'd be more inclined to have the subject field at both the top and
bottom if the top wasn't sufficient for some reason.
We can expect users ...Nope. No we can't.
Many people couldn't care less, of course. Many people must think that
subjects are a totally useless thing.
Then there are the opposite that write the entire message in the
subject and nothing in the body.
For these people, perhaps the
client could write something else that would be minimally useful for us.
I don't what would be minimally useful.
Or we could gently use societal push back and ask people to put a
subject in place.
In this case T'Bird misses the heart of the problem we're discussing
here. We're not discussing how to remember to write a subject, but to
only write it after the whole post is written, when it's much easier to
describe it in a few words. (Of course, it's nice to be remembered
about an empty subject.)
If the subject is blank and you hit send, Thunderbird asks you for a
subject. -- That sure seem to me like the subject being written
after the rest of the message.
Let's dig further.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 299 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 56:42:38 |
| Calls: | 6,690 |
| Files: | 12,225 |
| Messages: | 5,345,146 |